Boga Venkata Sai Yashwanth, v. The State Of Telangana

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.401 of 2026 DATE: 09.02.2026 BETWEEN:

Boga Venkata Sari Yashwanth .....petitioner/accused No.1 And The State of Telangana, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

.....Respondent/complainant

ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed praying this Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail who is arrayed as accused No.1 in Crime No.1622 of 2025 before the Kukatpally Police

Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 85 and 108 of BNS. 2.

The brief facts of the case are that the marriage between the petitioner and the deceased was solemnized on 14.08.2025 through an arranged marriage, and thereafter they lived separately at Hyderabad due to employment requirements. It was stated that the petitioner had provided a rented accommodation with all basic amenities and that the deceased never lodged any complaint alleging cruelty or dowry harassment during her lifetime. On the date of the incident, the deceased had locked herself in the bedroom, and upon receiving no response, the petitioner broke open the door, found her hanging, immediately attempted to save her, called emergency services, and shifted her to the hospital where she was declared brought dead.

3.

Heard Ms. Pillix Law Firm, appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State and Smt. Nikita Goenka, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2 - de facto complainant.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegations against the petitioner were vague, omnibus and based solely on belated statements of interested relatives without any independent corroboration and that the initial complaint contained only suspicion and no specific allegations of dowry demand or cruelty, and that the alteration of the offence to Section 80 of BNS was mechanical and unjustified. He further submitted that the essential ingredients of Section 80 of BNS, particularly cruelty or harassment for dowry soon before death, were not made out, and therefore the statutory presumption did not arise. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioner by allowing this Criminal Petition. 5.

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner stating that the there are serious allegations against the petitioner. Further, the investigation was not yet completed. At this stage, granting of bail to the petitioner does not arise. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

6.

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 submitted that the petitioner subjected the deceased to continuous mental and

physical harassment in connection with additional dowry demands soon after the marriage, despite substantial dowry being given at the time of marriage. She contended that due to such harassment by the petitioner and his family members, the deceased was driven to commit suicide by hanging and that a complaint was lodged on 13.12.2025, pursuant to which Crime No.1622 of 2025 was registered under Sections 80 and 108 of BNS after preliminary enquiry, and other family members were also added as accused. She further contended that CCTV footage from the rented house, found in suspicious circumstances after the cremation, was handed over to the police for investigation. Therefore, she prayed the Court to dismiss the Criminal Petition.

6.

In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and a perusal of the material available on record, the main allegation against the petitioner is that he harassed the deceased for additional dowry and that he had illegal intimacy with another woman, which allegedly drove the deceased to commit suicide. However, the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 15.12.2025. As seen from the record, the material part of the investigation has been

completed and L.Ws.1 to 17 witnesses have been examined. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the incarceration period of the petitioner, this Court deems it fit to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: i.

The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each, with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned XII Additional Judicial Magistrate at Kukatpally.

ii.

The petitioner shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 a.m., on every Monday for a period of eight (8) week or till filing of charge sheet whichever is earlier, for the purpose of investigation, and thereafter, as and when required.

iii.

The petitioner shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 437(3)

of Cr.P.C.(presently, Section 480(3) of the BNSS).

7.

Accordingly, the Criminal petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 09.02.2026 SAI

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.401 of 2026 Date: 09.02.2026 SAI